STAR HardProbes PWG

[Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Hello Grant,

Thank you for your reply and implementing my comments.
I have no further comments and I sign off.

Enjoy DNP!

Cheers
Nihar

On 2022-10-18 06:27, Grant McNamara wrote:
> Hi Nihar,
>
>  I have only shown figures for k = 0.0 in these slides, as it is a 10
> minute talk this is all I will have time to show so I did not see a
> need to list the k value repeatedly. I have made a point to show that
> the Q_jet label corresponds to the Q for k = 0.0, hopefully this will
> make this clearer.
>
>  The cartoon on slide 2 is meant just as a generic illustration of the
> jet production.
>
>  I have included the reference to AuAu because this is still one of
> the main motivations of performing this analysis in pp as well.
>
>  The systematics follow the jet mass figures previously shown so to
> keep consistency with this analysis I think it makes sense to keep
> these on a linear scale. The systematics that are not visible are also
> small. In a publication of this analysis I will provide a table.
>
>  I have not shown any fit to data, this is a fit to pythia-8 using the
> templates from pythia-8. I have clarified this on the slide as well.
>
>  I have made all the requested changes to plots other than adding k =
> 0.0, as I previously mentioned I expect that a clarification on slide
> 5 that Q_jet refers to k = 0.0 will be sufficient.
>
>  Best,
> Grant McNamara
>
> -------------------------
>
> From: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Nihar
> Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 2:34 AM
> To: webmaster AT star.bnl.gov <webmaster AT star.bnl.gov>; STAR HardProbes
> PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Grant McNamara for DNP
> 2022 submitted for review
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
> Hello Grant,
>
> Please find my comments on your nice presentation slides.
> I like your Slide#5,13,14 Pythia jet charge plot. Are the κ values
> the
> same as your pp data?
>
> Slide2: Just a comment on your right side cartoon. Is there any
> relevance of showing jet2,3 in opposite side to your jet charge
> measurement?
>
> Slide3: Infrared, collinear safe -> Infrared-collinear safe or
> Infrared
> and collinear safe
>
> SLide4: "The energy loss in AuAu collisions depends on the flavor of
> parton" -> It seems out of the context here as you are focusing on jet
> charge in pp collisions; you could mention one motivation for
> heavy-ion
> collisions related to jet charge. Is not it? (Comment: so far no
> modification in jet-charge is seen in heavy-ion—at least at the LHC)
>
> Slide5: In plot: mention what collision energy and p+p collisions,
> etc?
> Is this the same "κ=0" value used in the data?
>
> Slide8:
> _Make your y-axis label up to -0.1 so that lower cutoff data points
> can
> be visible (similarly for other plots)
> _ Please mention what "κ" value is used? Better would be in legend
>
> Slide9:
> _Give reference of RooUnfold;
> _right slide plot, X-Y axises title should be jet pT (please make
> changes).
> _Q depends on pT -> Q depends on jet pT
> _Requires 4D response -> Requires 4D response for 2D unfolding
>
> Slide10: Do you think it would be good to show semi-log scale (y-axis)
> for right side plot? So that all systematic contributions can be
> visible
> clearly. In the linear scale Hadronic corrections, not see at all.
>
> Slide11:
> _Make your y-axis label up to -0.1 so that lower cutoff data points
> can
> be visible (similarly for other plots)
> _ Please mention what "κ" value is used? Better would be in legend
>
> Slide12:
> "Mean shifts to from ~0.22 to ~0.33" -> Do you mean with increasing
> jet
> pT window? Then rephrase "Mean shifts from ~0.22 to ~0.33 with
> increasing jet pT"
> _ Please mention what "κ" value is used? Better would be in legend
>
> Slide13:
> _If your  "κ" value is different than that you used in data, then it
> would be good to have a comment/statement on it.
> _ Can you please elaborate "Normalized Templates" ? Do you it is
> normalized per jet?
>
> Slide14:
> _ Can you please elaborate "Fit results" ? Have you done any fitting
> with the data on slide12-13? It needs some explanation here.
>
> Slide15:
> _Not clear "Different jet resolution parameter R values"; please
> explain.
> _Provide constraint on quark vs gluon fraction value to improve
> simulation - > do you really mean to improve "simulation" here?
>
> Cheers
> Nihar
>
> On 2022-10-16 21:48, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l wrote:
> > Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> >
> > Grant McNamara (grantmcnamara AT wayne.edu) has submitted a material
> for a
> > review, please have a look:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/61349
> >
> > Deadline: 2022-10-27
> > ---
> > If you have any problems with the review process, please contact
> > webmaster AT www.star.bnl.gov
> > _______________________________________________
> > Star-hp-l mailing list
> > Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
> _______________________________________________
> Star-hp-l mailing list
> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l